There is a very strong evidence that man is strongly associated with mammoth extinction. I didn't say it was the only thing but strongly associated. The ice age megafauna had gone through dozens of ice ages/climate changes and was able to survive through adaption or migration. The only thing that changed with the end of the last ice age was man. Mammoth actually survived until 4600 years ago on Wrangel Island off Siberia...a place that man didn't reach until recently. The issue was that a large animal was unlikely to prosper on a smallish island. Look at the ground sloth. Killed off everywhere except cuba and when man reached cuba...well, you know what happened.
Wherever man went, the megafauna tended to die off. Why did the megafauna die off 60k years ago in Australia, 12k years ago in North America and 600 years ago in New Zealand. Can anyone prove that man killed them off, I suppose not since we can't go back, but the same can be said about habitat change also. I'm not trying to contend that what I'm saying is the undisputed truth that can't be questioned, but neither side has completely refuted the other. Yes, I have my opinions supported by fact but I acknowledge they remain opinions.
Part of what I was bringing up wasn't that these species could survive today, in many cases they couldn't, but I was taking issue with the idea that few go extinct due to reasons other than habitat loss. That rats could threaten the dodo is for certain but that isn't to say they couldn't survive with them. Some birds can overcome them, some can't. For example, in New Zealand, if they can get a kiwi to 8(?, memory fails) weeks, it can fight off stoats, before that, they are at risk. It varies.
There were a dozen species of moa, some the monster 500 lb. kind, others were just a few feet tall (smaller than a crane (bird type)). In the 90's, someone "credible" reported seeing a moa around Arthurs Pass (southern alps). It made a big splash when they went out and searched for it. It was revealed to be a hoax but people were excited. I have spent over 18 months over the years in NZ and am well versed in their conservation. I would be willing to be money that they would accommodate it if they had the opportunity.
They have several good-sized offshore island that have been rendered pest free where they allow endangered species to live. In 1948, the takahe was re-discovered in the Murchison Mountains to the west of Lake Te Anau. Fiordlands is a wild and forbidding place that for the most part, doesn't see a lot of traffic but the Murchisons are visible right across the lake from the town of Te Anau. In response to the Takahe being found, they shut off access to these mountains. No one may go there nor may boats land, even though it's within sight of a town, so I have to respect them for being willing to make such sacrifices.
Few animals go extinct in a way that means they could be realistically revived.
There are numerous species that went extinct due to hunting. The tassie tiger is a perfect example of a species that was persecuted by hunting. There is plenty of space in Tasmania for the tiger to live if hunting is not an issue. The steller sea cow is another. The dodo, the same. They were easy targets and were hunted to extinction plain and simple that had nothing to do with habitat.
Same goes for the New Zealand moa. Do you really think there wasn't habitat for them in New Zealand six hundred years ago. They were hunted to extinction, plain and simple. It's really quite difficult to argue that one. They were easy targets in a place that was relatively protein deficient (in terms of large animals, catching a tiny riflebird is a lot of work for a few morsels).
The mammoth went extinct due to man's hunting among dozen of ice age animals. It wasn't a habitat issue, it was hunting. It was the same for dozens of other ice age animals. This paragraph's assertions are more controversial than the first paragraphs, but I think the evidence is pretty strong that these extinctions weren't due to "natural" events only.
Granted, it might be hard to find space for a mammoth to live today but if revived, I'm sure we'd work out something. Dodo? Yes. Moa? yes. Sea cow? Not sure. However the assertion that few animals go extinct due to non-habitat reasons is not completely supported.
I've worked on a project from a very large software company that deals with encrypted tapes and is on the market. The idea is that the tape has been stolen. Who cares? You need to get the key that encrypted it, the key of the tape drive that wrote the tape, and get a drive itself. Not easy as they vet who buys. Yes, it can be done but not by your ordinary thief.
Could it have contained 2 mil medical records? I don't know, the tapes we were using two years ago were 400 gig. One person mentioned it must be related to a mainframe. Nope, modern workstations and tape drives. Tape is a thriving medium in some circles. A buttload of storage the size of a cigarette pack that is dirt cheap.
The system I've worked on is on the market and the idea is very good. There were some serious problems with the project and I don't know (and truthfully don't care) if they've been worked out. However, a thief without a large, well equipped organization behind them would still be at a loss what to do with the encrypted tape.
First off, I don't understand how their home value is diminished. Second, even if it is, so what? If Google is engaging in legal acts (making that assumption), why is it Google's concerns for their home value? I've always questioned this "property value" argument when others are engaging in legal behavior. If painting my purple polka dots on my house that are allowed by local statute, diminishes your home by $25, it's not my problem, it's yours. Same goes for this house in question. Oh yeah, don't forget the Streisand Effect.
TFA says : The opt-out systems work by planting a "cookie,"
What happens when you clear the cookies, oh say like I do everytime I quit firefox. Doesn't sound like much of an opt out if it only lasts a few hours.
I don't use gmail by choice because of this policy. Gmail isn't a free service, there is a cost to your privacy and if you make that choice, great. I have my own domain specifically for this reason that I'm not under the rules of another company. But for communications that I pay for, my isp thinks they can eavesdrop? Big difference between what google and the isp's are doing.
I'm aware of history. I also aware that you shouldn't suppose what others think so much as ask them what they think. But enough of that.
I wouldn't take that particular bet. But again I ask, in 2408 will people discuss the WWT? If you were to ask someone in that year, 'Who is Galileo?' and 'Who is Bill Gates?' I suspect more would know the former than the latter. Go back and look at the 'top' companies of 1908 and there are relatively few that would be recognized today. I suspect that in 400 years if you were to say to people, "Microsoft", the most common response would be "What's a microsoft?" I just don't believe that the WWT will change our world.
They lost me reeeeaaaaalllllllll quick on the video. When he said that this project will as profound an impact as did Galileo's telescopes, that's when he lost me. No, I didn't watch the video and this isn't an anti-microsoft rant. I'm interested when it comes out but I don't have time to watch videos that make claims like that. Galileo's invention was universe-shattering and people 400 years later know who he was and talk about him. Do you really believe that in 2408 people will be discussing the WWT? Me thinks not.
I'm not neccesarily opposed to limits. I'm a heavy user but not 200gb like the article discussed. The issue I would have is if I pay $40 for 100gb/month and I go over, I can see them charging $1/gb instead of upping you to the next tier, which might be a $50 tier, but I could see them screwing customers with exhorbitant "excess usage" charges. OTOH, if they do such a service, there would have to be no throttling or fake packets at any time for any reason. I would be suspicious if one would be given equal access at all times but it could happen.
Point 3: Columbus was not the first non-native, plain and simple. That the Norse were there is more 'extensive evidence', they were there, period, proven evidence. They lived their, set up homes and gardens, and hunted. Now the last part of your statement is correct, the Norse didn't have lasting impacts, except maybe on their own society (and truthfully, one could argue that many of the indian tribes won't have a lasting impact, in a thousand years, will you be able point to their influence? That is *NOT* trolling). But the first part of your statement is incorrect.
Personally, I'm not even sure that what we consider 'native' are really natives. No one knows who is 'really native' and who arrived somewhere to find someone else already there. Look at the archeaological record and often the people there 150 years ago, weren't there 500-1000 years ago. Societies are fluid, whether it be due to disease, environment, or conquest. Review Kennewick man (9k y.o. skeleton found in Washington). The 'native' tribes tried to claim him as their own but it was ruled that they couldn't prove ownership as there is no evidence that the specific native tribes were there thousands of years ago. Someone was, but who it was is unknown at this time and may never be known.
I'm not passing judgement on any group or set of beliefs, I'm just making the point of that word 'native' isn't neccesarily easy to define.
I have a domain that is only for job searches. I don't give out my webpage at work nor do I access my primary domain at work, neither the webpage nor that domain's email. Keep them separate, it's just better. There are a few usenet things out there, nothing incriminating and I only show up in a simple search for the fact of where I graduated with a masters. It's better that way, as I said.
Many people give up their vote because they don't want to take the chance of jury duty and others give it up because they can't be bothered. I'm surprised that it took a million to get people to give up the vote. Considering how little value our votes have come to have, I'm really surprised it took that much.
Oh, I went through the same area again last year, 8 years after the first time as well as another avalanche in Fiordlands about ten years old and yes, once the vegetation starts to regrow, it's just as much of a mess...just that you can't see more than ten feet.
Not the point how many people are affected. The point is that they can take it away from you when they feel like and say, "Suck it". What are you going to do? File a class action lawsuit where the lawyers actually make some cash and you get coupons for 20% expired peanuts at your local teams next away game.
I thought the ICANN resolution process was made relatively simple so that people from rich countries couldn't walk all over people from poor ones. Now before you abuse me on that notion, that's what I thought it was meant originally, I didn't say that's what it turned out to be:-).
Some years ago, there was case of a black man who escaped from an Alabama prison and lived a quiet life for fifty years before getting caught, believe it was a serious charge like murder. The case was examined and it looked like he had been treated unfairly (i.e. young black fighting the 'Man' in the deep south in the 30's, not a win situation for him at all, he didn't stand a chance). It was sort of a choreographed ballet but the governor of Alabama went through the motions of requesting extradition and the governor of Illinois turned him down saying the evidence was questionable and he lived with no further problems. I guess the black guy had to live with the prospect of never being able to go to Alabama.
It does bring up a wider point, what is the purpose of the judicial system. Punishment/retribution or rehabilitation. Is this man or the woman rehabilitated and won't offend again? Is that enough or do we need to use deterrence and punishment to show others. It's a serious question for which I'm not sure of the answer.
Ok, $9250 times....add the six...carry the four. Wow, that's a lot of money. Well, should be a lot of money they should be fined...I doubt it will happen.
This is a comment I posted on Fark:
I kid you not, I know this guy. In the early 90's, we had a landlord who put a stove on our porch. It sat there for six weeks. We finally put it on the landlords porch after repeatedly requesting it be moved and were evicted for said offense. Our friend moved in after us (even after being warned) and so did this Eric guy. We knew Eric as we would go visit our friends who still lived there.
One day our friend went downstairs into the basement and it was covered in dust. It turns out that he had broken into a real estate business (might have been home based) and stole a safe. He was breaking the safe open with a hammer and concrete dust was everywhere. The police were called and to misuse a fark term, jailarity ensued.
Our friend was then kicked out for stupid reasons and Eric had a new home for a while courtesy of the state of Minnesota if you know what I mean. He really was a one-kid crime wave.
I'm not going to give Eric a lot of credit for being smart, as when he was breaking open the safe he was smashing through the top which was quite thick instead of the bottom which was much thinner. Maybe a dumbass tag is appropriate...
A really smart thief gets someone else to do the dirty work for them, IMHO, of course (not that I really know:-)
A few days ago, there was two solid days where I couldn't get to google but no other place was having issues. I didn't call in to complain as I'm not the subscriber and can't get past customer service ID process. So yes, this was happening. Ended up using yahoo for two days. It made me feel unclean. 'Scuse me, gonna go take a shower.
I'm impressed. The fact that it's not safe, who cares. How many of us have either ability or will to do such a thing? It probably won't turn into a commercial project but maybe he and a few other folks like him can get together and figure out something new. Four years ago there were people from Cuba who turned a pickup into a boat and were 'driving' to Florida. They were caught partway out and sent back to Cuba. These are the ones you want. They see a problem, do something about it, and try to take care of it themselves and use creativity and thought. Deport the rest of the lot, keep the innovators. Here is a link: http://havanajournal.com/culture/entry/cubans_found_at_sea_on_pickup_truck_converted_to_motor_raft
I'd much rather have my own website. That way, I can do what I want, how I want, etc. I don't need mybook or facespace or whatever it is to control my contacts. People that I care about have my email and phone and know my website. People that run across my website have a secondary email that they contact me should they choose. To me, their way of doing things is too constricting. I've not joined up even with friends prompting me. I have their email, phone, or address when I want to contact them. Guess I'm grumpy about these newfangled technologies.
The amount of disinformation is staggering. I have yet to meet a single person who says you can't eavesdrop legally. I'm not surprised why the powers that be lie to us, I am surprised how may people accept it. I don't get it.
Slashdot Mirror
Wherever man went, the megafauna tended to die off. Why did the megafauna die off 60k years ago in Australia, 12k years ago in North America and 600 years ago in New Zealand. Can anyone prove that man killed them off, I suppose not since we can't go back, but the same can be said about habitat change also. I'm not trying to contend that what I'm saying is the undisputed truth that can't be questioned, but neither side has completely refuted the other. Yes, I have my opinions supported by fact but I acknowledge they remain opinions.
Part of what I was bringing up wasn't that these species could survive today, in many cases they couldn't, but I was taking issue with the idea that few go extinct due to reasons other than habitat loss. That rats could threaten the dodo is for certain but that isn't to say they couldn't survive with them. Some birds can overcome them, some can't. For example, in New Zealand, if they can get a kiwi to 8(?, memory fails) weeks, it can fight off stoats, before that, they are at risk. It varies.
There were a dozen species of moa, some the monster 500 lb. kind, others were just a few feet tall (smaller than a crane (bird type)). In the 90's, someone "credible" reported seeing a moa around Arthurs Pass (southern alps). It made a big splash when they went out and searched for it. It was revealed to be a hoax but people were excited. I have spent over 18 months over the years in NZ and am well versed in their conservation. I would be willing to be money that they would accommodate it if they had the opportunity.
They have several good-sized offshore island that have been rendered pest free where they allow endangered species to live. In 1948, the takahe was re-discovered in the Murchison Mountains to the west of Lake Te Anau. Fiordlands is a wild and forbidding place that for the most part, doesn't see a lot of traffic but the Murchisons are visible right across the lake from the town of Te Anau. In response to the Takahe being found, they shut off access to these mountains. No one may go there nor may boats land, even though it's within sight of a town, so I have to respect them for being willing to make such sacrifices.
There are numerous species that went extinct due to hunting. The tassie tiger is a perfect example of a species that was persecuted by hunting. There is plenty of space in Tasmania for the tiger to live if hunting is not an issue. The steller sea cow is another. The dodo, the same. They were easy targets and were hunted to extinction plain and simple that had nothing to do with habitat.
Same goes for the New Zealand moa. Do you really think there wasn't habitat for them in New Zealand six hundred years ago. They were hunted to extinction, plain and simple. It's really quite difficult to argue that one. They were easy targets in a place that was relatively protein deficient (in terms of large animals, catching a tiny riflebird is a lot of work for a few morsels).
The mammoth went extinct due to man's hunting among dozen of ice age animals. It wasn't a habitat issue, it was hunting. It was the same for dozens of other ice age animals. This paragraph's assertions are more controversial than the first paragraphs, but I think the evidence is pretty strong that these extinctions weren't due to "natural" events only.
Granted, it might be hard to find space for a mammoth to live today but if revived, I'm sure we'd work out something. Dodo? Yes. Moa? yes. Sea cow? Not sure. However the assertion that few animals go extinct due to non-habitat reasons is not completely supported.
I've worked on a project from a very large software company that deals with encrypted tapes and is on the market. The idea is that the tape has been stolen. Who cares? You need to get the key that encrypted it, the key of the tape drive that wrote the tape, and get a drive itself. Not easy as they vet who buys. Yes, it can be done but not by your ordinary thief. Could it have contained 2 mil medical records? I don't know, the tapes we were using two years ago were 400 gig. One person mentioned it must be related to a mainframe. Nope, modern workstations and tape drives. Tape is a thriving medium in some circles. A buttload of storage the size of a cigarette pack that is dirt cheap. The system I've worked on is on the market and the idea is very good. There were some serious problems with the project and I don't know (and truthfully don't care) if they've been worked out. However, a thief without a large, well equipped organization behind them would still be at a loss what to do with the encrypted tape.
First off, I don't understand how their home value is diminished. Second, even if it is, so what? If Google is engaging in legal acts (making that assumption), why is it Google's concerns for their home value? I've always questioned this "property value" argument when others are engaging in legal behavior. If painting my purple polka dots on my house that are allowed by local statute, diminishes your home by $25, it's not my problem, it's yours. Same goes for this house in question. Oh yeah, don't forget the Streisand Effect.
TFA says : The opt-out systems work by planting a "cookie," What happens when you clear the cookies, oh say like I do everytime I quit firefox. Doesn't sound like much of an opt out if it only lasts a few hours.
I don't use gmail by choice because of this policy. Gmail isn't a free service, there is a cost to your privacy and if you make that choice, great. I have my own domain specifically for this reason that I'm not under the rules of another company. But for communications that I pay for, my isp thinks they can eavesdrop? Big difference between what google and the isp's are doing.
I'm aware of history. I also aware that you shouldn't suppose what others think so much as ask them what they think. But enough of that. I wouldn't take that particular bet. But again I ask, in 2408 will people discuss the WWT? If you were to ask someone in that year, 'Who is Galileo?' and 'Who is Bill Gates?' I suspect more would know the former than the latter. Go back and look at the 'top' companies of 1908 and there are relatively few that would be recognized today. I suspect that in 400 years if you were to say to people, "Microsoft", the most common response would be "What's a microsoft?" I just don't believe that the WWT will change our world.
They lost me reeeeaaaaalllllllll quick on the video. When he said that this project will as profound an impact as did Galileo's telescopes, that's when he lost me. No, I didn't watch the video and this isn't an anti-microsoft rant. I'm interested when it comes out but I don't have time to watch videos that make claims like that. Galileo's invention was universe-shattering and people 400 years later know who he was and talk about him. Do you really believe that in 2408 people will be discussing the WWT? Me thinks not.
I'm not neccesarily opposed to limits. I'm a heavy user but not 200gb like the article discussed. The issue I would have is if I pay $40 for 100gb/month and I go over, I can see them charging $1/gb instead of upping you to the next tier, which might be a $50 tier, but I could see them screwing customers with exhorbitant "excess usage" charges. OTOH, if they do such a service, there would have to be no throttling or fake packets at any time for any reason. I would be suspicious if one would be given equal access at all times but it could happen.
Maybe they drive the clock around the block for a while trying to see if they relativistic time effects like Hafele and Keating http://www.teslaphysics.com/Chapters/Chapter030-H-K.htm
Summary of article: Synchronize two atomic clocks and fly one clock around world in jet and see if it differs from a clock at "rest" on the ground.
They did see if they could alter the clocks by gravity, motion is another way.
Point 3: Columbus was not the first non-native, plain and simple. That the Norse were there is more 'extensive evidence', they were there, period, proven evidence. They lived their, set up homes and gardens, and hunted. Now the last part of your statement is correct, the Norse didn't have lasting impacts, except maybe on their own society (and truthfully, one could argue that many of the indian tribes won't have a lasting impact, in a thousand years, will you be able point to their influence? That is *NOT* trolling). But the first part of your statement is incorrect.
Personally, I'm not even sure that what we consider 'native' are really natives. No one knows who is 'really native' and who arrived somewhere to find someone else already there. Look at the archeaological record and often the people there 150 years ago, weren't there 500-1000 years ago. Societies are fluid, whether it be due to disease, environment, or conquest. Review Kennewick man (9k y.o. skeleton found in Washington). The 'native' tribes tried to claim him as their own but it was ruled that they couldn't prove ownership as there is no evidence that the specific native tribes were there thousands of years ago. Someone was, but who it was is unknown at this time and may never be known.
I'm not passing judgement on any group or set of beliefs, I'm just making the point of that word 'native' isn't neccesarily easy to define.
I have a domain that is only for job searches. I don't give out my webpage at work nor do I access my primary domain at work, neither the webpage nor that domain's email. Keep them separate, it's just better. There are a few usenet things out there, nothing incriminating and I only show up in a simple search for the fact of where I graduated with a masters. It's better that way, as I said.
Many people give up their vote because they don't want to take the chance of jury duty and others give it up because they can't be bothered. I'm surprised that it took a million to get people to give up the vote. Considering how little value our votes have come to have, I'm really surprised it took that much.
Oh, I went through the same area again last year, 8 years after the first time as well as another avalanche in Fiordlands about ten years old and yes, once the vegetation starts to regrow, it's just as much of a mess...just that you can't see more than ten feet.
Not the point how many people are affected. The point is that they can take it away from you when they feel like and say, "Suck it". What are you going to do? File a class action lawsuit where the lawyers actually make some cash and you get coupons for 20% expired peanuts at your local teams next away game.
How you gonna trust that router?
I thought the ICANN resolution process was made relatively simple so that people from rich countries couldn't walk all over people from poor ones. Now before you abuse me on that notion, that's what I thought it was meant originally, I didn't say that's what it turned out to be :-).
Some years ago, there was case of a black man who escaped from an Alabama prison and lived a quiet life for fifty years before getting caught, believe it was a serious charge like murder. The case was examined and it looked like he had been treated unfairly (i.e. young black fighting the 'Man' in the deep south in the 30's, not a win situation for him at all, he didn't stand a chance). It was sort of a choreographed ballet but the governor of Alabama went through the motions of requesting extradition and the governor of Illinois turned him down saying the evidence was questionable and he lived with no further problems. I guess the black guy had to live with the prospect of never being able to go to Alabama.
It does bring up a wider point, what is the purpose of the judicial system. Punishment/retribution or rehabilitation. Is this man or the woman rehabilitated and won't offend again? Is that enough or do we need to use deterrence and punishment to show others. It's a serious question for which I'm not sure of the answer.
Ok, $9250 times....add the six...carry the four. Wow, that's a lot of money. Well, should be a lot of money they should be fined...I doubt it will happen.
This is a comment I posted on Fark: I kid you not, I know this guy. In the early 90's, we had a landlord who put a stove on our porch. It sat there for six weeks. We finally put it on the landlords porch after repeatedly requesting it be moved and were evicted for said offense. Our friend moved in after us (even after being warned) and so did this Eric guy. We knew Eric as we would go visit our friends who still lived there. One day our friend went downstairs into the basement and it was covered in dust. It turns out that he had broken into a real estate business (might have been home based) and stole a safe. He was breaking the safe open with a hammer and concrete dust was everywhere. The police were called and to misuse a fark term, jailarity ensued. Our friend was then kicked out for stupid reasons and Eric had a new home for a while courtesy of the state of Minnesota if you know what I mean. He really was a one-kid crime wave. I'm not going to give Eric a lot of credit for being smart, as when he was breaking open the safe he was smashing through the top which was quite thick instead of the bottom which was much thinner. Maybe a dumbass tag is appropriate ...
A really smart thief gets someone else to do the dirty work for them, IMHO, of course (not that I really know :-)
A few days ago, there was two solid days where I couldn't get to google but no other place was having issues. I didn't call in to complain as I'm not the subscriber and can't get past customer service ID process. So yes, this was happening. Ended up using yahoo for two days. It made me feel unclean. 'Scuse me, gonna go take a shower.
I'm impressed. The fact that it's not safe, who cares. How many of us have either ability or will to do such a thing? It probably won't turn into a commercial project but maybe he and a few other folks like him can get together and figure out something new. Four years ago there were people from Cuba who turned a pickup into a boat and were 'driving' to Florida. They were caught partway out and sent back to Cuba. These are the ones you want. They see a problem, do something about it, and try to take care of it themselves and use creativity and thought. Deport the rest of the lot, keep the innovators. Here is a link: http://havanajournal.com/culture/entry/cubans_found_at_sea_on_pickup_truck_converted_to_motor_raft
I'd much rather have my own website. That way, I can do what I want, how I want, etc. I don't need mybook or facespace or whatever it is to control my contacts. People that I care about have my email and phone and know my website. People that run across my website have a secondary email that they contact me should they choose. To me, their way of doing things is too constricting. I've not joined up even with friends prompting me. I have their email, phone, or address when I want to contact them. Guess I'm grumpy about these newfangled technologies.
The amount of disinformation is staggering. I have yet to meet a single person who says you can't eavesdrop legally. I'm not surprised why the powers that be lie to us, I am surprised how may people accept it. I don't get it.
I see a Firefox extension in the making!